|
My guess is that you are using a proportional font in the printer when you print the data.
Try a monospaced font instead, such as Courier New.
Alcohol. The cause of, and the solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
|
|
|
|
|
How do I switch to a monospaced font? Where do I change, in the program or in the printer? Please give a step by step guideline. 
Best Wishes ....... ARIJIT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can we use DeviceIOControl method in case of RAID controllers?
|
|
|
|
|
i have a problem with the HP1902 Monitor, when i minimize the first screen but it stil appear the first screen on the other project's screen.
so as i mention above can you please find out the solution for me?
|
|
|
|
|
What?
Cheers,
Sebastian
--
"If it was two men, the non-driver would have challenged the driver to simply crash through the gates. The macho image thing, you know." - Marc Clifton
|
|
|
|
|
My computer is festooned with USB ports and I thought they must all be 2.0 devices, but every time I plug in a new (for example) external hard drive I get a message to the effect of, "Errr, Dave, you know you could get a whole lot more performance if you plugged this device into a USB 2.0 port". It then displays a list of potential ports I could use.
The problem I have six ports coming off the MB, which I assumed were USB 2.0, two on front and four on the back, plus a four-port PCI USB card that I could have sworn was a USB 2.0 (the packaging was disposed of immediately after installation), but I can't tell which device in the list is running on which hardware port, much less if any of them are actually USB 2.0.
Is there any way to determine the capabilities of these ports? I can't seem to find anything useful from Device Manager.
Thanks for any advice.
QRZ? de WAØTTN
|
|
|
|
|
It's a bit of a dirty approach, but here goes:
In USB 1.x, the programming interface from the PC to the USB controller wasn't standardised. Intel came up with one solution they called 'Universal Host Controller Interface' (UHCI) but there's a second solution defined by Compaq, Microsoft and National Semiconductor called 'Open Host Controller Interface', OHCI. I think this was partly a technology issue - OHCI reportedly requires less software and generally lower CPU usage - but also a licensing one.
For USB 2.0, the software people put their collective feet down and insisted on a common controller interface, which is called Enhanced Host Controller (EHCI). In Device Manager, you'll typically see USB 2.0 controllers listed as USB2 Enhanced Host Controller.
You can always find how a device is connecting to the system by selecting View, Devices by Connection from the menu. By expanding the tree, you can see whether a USB Hi-Speed device (connected to each port in turn) is connected to an EHCI or to a UCHI or OHCI controller.
This is further complicated because physical ports can be 'connected' to both an EHC and a UHC/OHC. The system works out whether the device is requesting Hi-Speed (480Mbps) and if so, 'connects' it logically to the EHC. If not, it connects it logically to the UHC or OHC. That's why I suggest using a Hi-Speed device. Most modern integrated USB controllers actually do both in one chip or subsystem of the chip and the UHC or OHC presented to the OS is generally referred to as a virtual device.
DoEvents: Generating unexpected recursion since 1991
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, thanks very much for all the information Mike! I can see clearly now that the computer I was wondering about doesn't have any USB 2.0 ports at all. Armed with the info you gave me, I checked another computer and found that it has a bunch of USB 1.x ports, but it also has one EHC controller. So now my only other problem is to figure out which hardware jacks are fed by which controller. The one USB 2.0 controller says it has 8 ports, but there aren't that many USB jacks on the computer, so I'm assuming that not all of the hardware ports are actually coming out of the controller chip to jacks.
At least this gives me more insight into identifiying what hardware I've got. Thanks again!
Dave
QRZ? de WAØTTN
|
|
|
|
|
As I remember there is an option to enable USB 2.0 configuration in BIOS setup.
Maybe you have 2.0 ports but they are not enabled, that's why when you plug your usb device you are getting that pop-up message.
Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
Use usbview.exe. It will show you all the ports, decvices and capabilities on your machine.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! This is a really neat tool!
QRZ? de WAØTTN
|
|
|
|
|
Little off the subject - I am looking for a easy way to convince windows that USB drive is a dynamic drive.
In past I plugged the drive intenally and mark it dynamic than moved it onto USB hardware. But since my current external drive is "sealed" I cannot do that without voiding the warranty.
Anyway, even when the USB drive is dynamic windows will regenerate it every time you turn the power on - no good.
Looking for a real dynamic USB hard drive "fdisk" program.
Vaclav (AA7EJ)
|
|
|
|
|
What I have:
- An external hard drive (2.5 inch 30gb from an old laptop in an external USB case).
- A laptop (three months old with single 200gb hard drive) running XP Pro that's fully updated.
- A desktop machine (2 years old with 2 IDE drives and 2 SATA drives) that is also running XP Pro that's fully updated.
Problem Description:
When I connect the external drive to my laptop, it works fine, in that Explorer sees it, and I can even change the drive letter.
When I connect it to my desktop system, it's seen by the device manager, and it shows up in the list of USB devices that can be disconnected (in the system tray), but it doesn't show up in Explorer, nor does it appear in the Disk Manager.<br />
Other Notes:
Jump drives work fine (I have three ranging from 512mb to 4gb) in both machines.
SOLUTION:
On my desktop machine, I don't have a front-mounted USB connector, so I have a USB cable that hangs off the front so I can plug in my jump drives. HOWEVER, I have a cable on the external hard drive, and I was just plugging that into the extension cable. This made the cable *TOO LONG* - the signal isn't strong enough to go 12 feet (beyond device recognition, anyway). Plugging the hard drive's cable into another USB port solved the issue.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: 12 feet USB cable
I use a three footer for that, but I'll have to keep this in mind.
|
|
|
|
|
wow bad luck. the cable would have been the last thing i would have checked if the device was showing up 
i dread to think how much hair was lost/ money was deposited into the swear jar from this little experience
|
|
|
|
|
What threw me was that it would show up on the laptop and work fine. When I realized that I was using a longer overall cable length, I kinda figured that would be the problem.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
|
On a recent trip to the thrift store, I bought a 5.25" floppy drive -- just because  . It's no surprise that my current system doesn't support it.
Are there current chipsets/motherboards that do support 5.25" floppy drives?
It occurred to me, as I was writing this, that there may be a PCI card that would do it, but a brief search didn't find any.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I recall, 5.25" and 3.5" floppy drives used the same controller board and cabling: you could mix either type on the two plugs on the ribbon cable. However, the floppy controller has been removed from most new systems. There's been a serious effort to remove it, because it had an awful programming interface that required very frequent interrupts (one per byte transferred in the non-DMA case, and I think there was some problem that stopped DMA mode being useful) meaning that a lot of CPU power was just being wasted on managing the floppy drive.
I think the market window for PCI floppy controllers was very small, if any. While floppy drives were still useful, there tended to be a controller on the motherboard; USB floppy drives came into existence before on-board low-pin-count/ISA floppy controllers were retired.
I suppose it might be possible to dismantle a USB 3.5" floppy drive and see if there's a connector you could plug into your 5.25" drive instead! It might still not report the right kind of drive to the OS, though.
DoEvents: Generating unexpected recursion since 1991
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Dimmick wrote: However, the floppy controller has been removed from most new systems.
Are you referring to retail here? It's still taking up space on most DIY boards. Granted it's been put below the last PCI slot making it extremely obnoxious if you actually need to access it once your box is built, but it's still generally there. IIRC most're still even bundling a floppy cable in the box.  The only thing I can think for that is they goofed and ordered several years of supply in advance, but even that strains credibility.
Mike Dimmick wrote: I suppose it might be possible to dismantle a USB 3.5" floppy drive and see if there's a connector you could plug into your 5.25" drive instead! It might still not report the right kind of drive to the OS, though.
I'd be shocked to find anything that could be used without being brutalized by a soldiering iron. Even though they're electrically the same the physical connectors are massively different. The 5.25" cable has a plug that looks like an expansion card slot vs the IDEesque connector on a 3.5" cable.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots.
-- Robert Royall
|
|
|
|
|
dan neely wrote: soldiering iron
What caliber?
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Dimmick wrote: dismantle a USB 3.5" floppy drive
Oh, yeah, because this is such a worthwhile endeavor. 
Maybe in a few years there'll be one at the thrift store.
|
|
|
|
|
I would suggest that the most flexible approach might be to get up an ancient machine which supports DOS and networking and can operate with an old floppy drive. I think there were some utilities once upon a time that were designed to copy files from a floppy drive more quickly than would be possible using DOS (they would read the FAT, figure out an optimal sequence to read all other necessary sectors, and then read the sectors in that sequence). If you have disks containing lots of small files, such a program might be able to read the disks a lot faster than would DOS. Some such programs might also have been able to read sectors in whatever order they appeared under the drive head (which could save up to 200ms per track) but I'm not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but the goal was to have it attached to a current computer.
As it turns out, I was visiting my father-in-law last weekend and noticed that he's using his previous computer as a monitor riser (his current computer is a mini-tower). The old box has a 5.25" floppy drive! And it probably works. The next time I visit, I'll have to bring some floppies. 
|
|
|
|
|
You were a victim of what I call "mother in-law syndrome".
She buys things just because they are cheap and there without really having any need for them.
Similar to climbing a mountain just because it is there!
Seriously, beware that floppies come also in 8 inch size!
Unfortunately, I do not have any real applications you could run after you find your 286 machine with DOS 1.0 !
Cheers
Vaclav
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
